SAMUNDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner while undergoing life sentence is alleged to have committed an offence under Section 326/324/323/34, Indian Penal Code, in case FIR No. 87 dated 26th January, 1985. He was convicted and sentenced to simple imprisonment for three months under Section 323/34, IPC six months, rigorous imprisonment under Section 324/34 IPC, and rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 326/34 IPC. He was also awarded a fine of Rs. 100/- in each case, or, in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two months. The period of imprisonment already undergone by the petitioner during the investigation and trial of the case was directed to be set off. This petition has been filed with a prayer to order that these sentences should run concurrent with the life sentence, as urged by the counsel for the petitioner. In support of this contention, reliance has been placed on the provisions of section 427, Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) AFTER the said case was registered the investigation made and the trial completed, the petitioner was undergoing life imprisonment. There was no extra period which he had to undergo after the said case was registered against him till his sentence. If in such situations, sentences for offences committed during the life imprisonment are made to run concurrent with the life sentence, it will result in no punishment or sentence for the offence committed during the period of life imprisonment. In, my view, the provisions of section 427, Cr.P.C. cannot be invoked in such circumstances, as otherwise the convicts undergoing life imprisonment would get a licence to commit any offence in jail and get no extra punishment for that. The words used by the trial court in the impugned order that the period already undergone by the accused during investigation and trial of the case shall be set off means only if the petitioner had undergone some period in custody for this offence other than the custody as a lifer. In this case, as a matter of fact, no period was undergone by the petitioner for this offence. He remained a lifer throughout the period of investigation and trial, and the benefit of that period has already been given to him. I find no merit in this petition. The same is dismissed. However, sentence of three months R.I. six months' R.I. and one year R.I. mentioned above shall run concurrently inter se for ends of justice, although not argued by the counsel.